Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 18:11:44 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org> To: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> Cc: "David Xu" <bsddiy@163.net>, "Nik Clayton" <nik@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc rc Message-ID: <20010426011144.BFE4D3E2A@bazooka.unixfreak.org> In-Reply-To: <200104260051.f3Q0pbv46632@earth.backplane.com>; from dillon@earth.backplane.com on "Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:51:37 -0700 (PDT)"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com> writes: > Hmph. I don't see how it could hurt since it amounts to the > same thing that it was doing before, but why bother in the first > place? The original code was just fine. My guess is: for consistency. The documentation says to do it that way, and not following that serves to confuse some newcomers (e.g., "The docs say to do it this way, but how come /etc/rc doesn't? Is there something wrong with the way in the docs?"). This patch actually closes a docs/ PR on the subject. And as you say, it amounts to the same thing, so it shouldn't really hurt anything. Regards, Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010426011144.BFE4D3E2A>